- If you want to 'grow', 'grow' with us!
Join the group; and you will double your size 'overnight'! What are
you waiting for?
Don, Bob, David: Gary Treistman is waiting for you on the Meet Up
Group, and will join up here once you make your 'move'.
What's the holdup?
Since you ask so forcefully, let me respond with candor. I was
impressed with the turnout on Tuesday. It was a sizable group of
people who evidently had some things in common, such as support for
Ron Paul. However, just what else they had in common was not explored
in much depth, considering the length of the meeting.
Ron Paul has well-known positions on many issues. Some of us differ
with him on a few, such as immigration and abortion, but we supported
him anyway due to agreement on many other issues. In contrast, the
only specific issue proposed at the meeting was term limits.
Libertarianism is not defined by support for term limits. If we are
not to be a group of broadly libertarian activists in various parties,
then I will soon lose interest.
I just heard a talk by Lawrence Reid at FEE in which he described
joining YAF in the 1960's. This was a Republican group, I believe, but
they handed him various books such as Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom",
Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" and others. We might use Ron
Paul's "The Revolution: A Manifesto" to educate/uncover supporters of
libertarian ideas. Then we would at least know what we have in common.
I am quite willing to give your group a chance. Let's see if those who
showed up last Tuesday can read Ron's book and come away feeling that
they agree with most of it, and be willing to participate in a group
that uses it as a litmus test.
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 12:16 AM, Carl Svensson <csvensson@...> wrote:
> If you want to 'grow', 'grow' with us!
> Join the group; and you will double your size 'overnight'! What are
> you waiting for?
> Don, Bob, David: Gary Treistman is waiting for you on the Meet Up
> Group, and will join up here once you make your 'move'.
> What's the holdup?
- --- In RLCNY-HV@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Cotton" <rmcotton@...> wrote in
>explored in much depth, considering the length of the meeting.
> Since you ask so forcefully, let me respond with candor. I was
> impressed with the turnout on Tuesday. It was a sizable group of
> people who evidently had some things in common, such as support for
> Ron Paul. However, just what else they had in common was not
I appreciate candor, and I hate being "pushy", but time limitations
require me to be "forceful" -- hey, I'm 65 -- if we are to
accomplish anything tangible in the near future.
I do not want to mislead anyone, by the way. While the majority of
those attending Tuesday were Rob Paul partisans, every one was not,
and everyone will not be.
What everyone at that meeting had in common was a desire for limited
government, free markets, personal freedom, and transparency in
government to name a key few.
We are going to have to reach out beyond the members of the Ron Paul
coalition and the Libertarian Party if we are too have positive
results on the electoral field. (Indeed, you, and I have major
differences with many of the elements that surrounded Ron Paul
(read the platform of the Constitution Party for example).
> "....the only specific issue proposed at the meeting was termlimits".
I focused on that issue because it has such overwhelming support of
the American people, and in the longer term, it is a "winning issue"
even though it is overwhelming disparaged by most 'professional
politicians" and the "mainline" media.
I did touch upon Project Vote Smart, and its importance in finding
out where candidates stand on the issues. Frankly, this is another
area which most politicians like to avoid. Don't believe me?
Contact your Congressman or Assemblyman tomorrow and ask him does
he support or oppose ........... 90% of the time you will be stone
walled if it a contentious subject, and this is despite the fact
that most of our elected officials are safely tucked away in
And that is why I touched upon the importance of an effective
If you push long and hard enough, more often than not, you can
find out where your representatives stand on a particular issue,
but if you try to reach out as an individual as I have, and made
contact with every member of the state legislature, you are going
to get know where.
I do know that the group lost focus, and as I stated in the Meet Up
venue, that was my fault. However, the primary purpose of joining
together at that first meeting was to 'feel each other out', and
find something about each other. I, for one, accomplished this,
and I have been in contact with many of the folks individually at
this point, including you with "our conversation" about extending
libertarian programming in the Hudson Valley.
> If we are not to be a group of broadly libertarian activists invarious parties, then I will soon lose interest.
Unfortunately, we have to extend our informal alliance and
fellowship beyond libertarians to the larger "advocates of
limited government" if we are to be successful in curbing some
of the abuses that are falling upon our Constitution and us. If you
lose interest or we are not successful in achieving tangible goals,
not only will you lose interest, but the prospects for your
children and grandchildren to enjoy even our limited freedoms of
today will be greatly reduced.
> I just heard a talk by Lawrence Reid at FEE in which he described
> joining YAF in the 1960's. This was a Republican group, I believe,
I was a member of YAF from 1960 to 1964, and while a majority of
its sponsors were Republicans, it also enjoyed the support of many
Democratic officeholders, and others too. (The political scene of
the early 60's was much different than it is today).
> they handed him various books such as Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom",The reality was that YAF was a political action organization, not a
> Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" and others.
scholarly one, and for that reason my brother Art and I pulled back
from YAF and the University of Arizona YR's to work with ISI --
at that time the Intercollegiate Society of Individualists, now
the Intercollegiate Studies Institute -- and we co-founded a
University of Arizona Chapter. ISI was the voice of the intellectual
student right -- a necessary fusion of traditionalists and
libertarians -- which reached out to try to "educate" (inform) the
intellectuals on campus of the superiority of free markets, limited
government, and personal freedom. "Intellectuals" by the way, were
defined by our movement as the dealers of "second-hand ideas". In
reality, "intellectuals" are the folks who end up in academia
teaching the "teachers of teachers", the folks in the editorial
offices of influential media outlets, the scholars in"think-tanks",
and the like. ISI, which was fashioned after the Fabian Society,
was successful, especially in some areas (most notably Economics),
and hopefully, will continue to have a positive impact.
>We might use Ron Paul's "The Revolution: A Manifesto" toeducate/uncover supporters of libertarian ideas. Then we would at
least know what we have in common. I am quite willing to give your
group a chance. Let's see if those who showed up last Tuesday can read
Ron's book and come away feeling that they agree with most of it, and
be willing to participate in a group that uses it as a litmus test>.
Bob: This is a political action group; we seek to direct public
policy in a pro-freedom direction. Frankly, you can not do that by
"uncovering" supporters of libertarian ideas one by one, nor by
spending the bulk of your time reading and discussing among ourselves
OR spending one's time in political action that is ineffectual in
producing results (i.e., sign waving, demonstrating at the Federal
Reserve, and the like).
I do not see "the group" as a "formal" one, but rather as a coalition
of individuals that will undertake to support candidates, support and
oppose legislation, and the like, when possible. And, I am confident
that we can rally around many, many things that will advance free
markets, limited government, and personal freedom. And, I would
suggest that the way to find out what people think is to talk to them.
- --- In RLCNY-HV@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Svensson" <csvensson@...> wrote:
>elements that surrounded Ron Paul(read the platform of the
> (Indeed, you, and I have major differences with many of the
NY Constitution Party for example).
If you read the platform of the NY Constitution Party, I think
that you will agree that there are aspects that both of us do not
agree with, but the reality is that these folks are limited
government "folks" too, support free markets, transparency in
government and defend the Constitution. (And you might remember
too that Ron Paul endorsed the Constitution Party nominee over
the Libertarian one).
We can often work together to support and oppose legislation, and
at times, support the same candidates too (i.e., Ron Paul).
As far as I know, we only have one member of the NY Constitution
aboard at this time - Joe Eldred, an officer, and member of their
State Board who lives in Orange County (Hi Joe). If we are
successful, I would expect more members to join us in time,
including Paul Henderson, another officer and State Board member
who hails from your "neck of the woods".